Do you like air travel with a service dog? Air travel makes some people very nervous. The crowds, the noise and flying itself can cause unease. But there are classes people can take to help them defeat their fear of flying. And, let me introduce similar training for service dogs that suffer the same problem

Service dogs almost never leave the side of the people they care for. You will see them working on buses, trains and other public transport systems. But the busy environment found at an airport can trouble even the best trained working dog.

    People with disabilities depend on their dogs. They want the animals to safely guide them through security areas. They also need the dogs to remain calm on duty on the plane, even when the flying is not smooth. This takes special training. The Air Hollywood K9 Flight School is one place where such help can be found.

    The school has a piece of equipment that provides the sights, sounds and even the feel of an airplane in flight. It is called a flight simulator, which was built for filming airplane scenes in movies.

    Sandy Alexander has a disability that requires his two-year-old dog, Doc, to be always at his side. Mr. Alexander took the dog to the flight school to get him ready for plane trips. He says Doc did not like the bumpy part of the flight simulation( 模拟).

    Dog trainer Mary Segall is with Canine Companions for Independence. It provides dogs for people with disabilities. Ms Segall says successful training is based on a simple rule: preparation.

    " Dogs need to be exposed gradually and repetitively to stimulation, to the environment, to loud noises, to sounds and to other dogs so that when this experience happens to them on a daily basis, they are  able to act in a way that they're used to acting and that they don't get excitable."

    Dog owners who attended the training at Air Hollywood K9 Flight School say they now feel much more at ease about future flight. Their dogs also seem ready for take-off.

    A new library in Tianjin—Tianjin Binhai Public Library—recently became an online hit. The Daily Mail described it as “breathtaking”. One look at the library and you'll see why. With its very futuristic design and walls loaded with books, it's the dream library of every book lover.

    But there's a burning question lying in the back of our minds: with physical bookstores closing down one by one, what makes libraries survive the wave of digitalization? Do we really still need libraries as we've got the internet in our hands?

    Reporter Ian Clark has the answer. “Libraries are not declining in importance. People are simply changing the way they use them,” he wrote on the Guardian website. Since not everyone can afford a smartphone, a tablet or an internet connection, and not everyone knows how to search the Internet correctly and efficiently, it's public libraries that make sure that these resources are available to a larger group of people.

    And one of the pitfalls that come with online materials is that they're not always reliable. “Google doesn't tell you what you're not getting, so people need to evaluate (评估) the quality of what they see on their screens,” Sarah Pritchard, dean of libraries at Northwestern University, told Northwestern Research Magazine. And libraries are usually where that “evaluation” happens.

    But we still need the physical space that a library provides. It's something that's called a “third place”, according to the Seattle Times. This is a place in which we can fully concentrate on our study and work without easily getting distracted. Compared to other “third places” like coffee shops, libraries have a “non-commercial nature” that allows you to relax completely.

    “Nobody is trying to sell you anything in the library. There is no pressure to buy and there is no judgment of your choices,” Anne Goulding, a professor at Victoria University in New Zealand, wrote on the Newsroom website.

    Our cities have never been denser, taller, or busier than they are now, and with that, comes the constant battle for land. But if we look at aerial images of any city center, we can quickly spot plenty of unused space — the rooftops.

    So what can we use this precious resource for? In a growing number of high-density cities, some of it is dedicated to recreation — everything from bars and pools, to soccer pitches and running tracks can now be found atop skyscrapers. But when a rooftop offers access to sunlight, there are two more obvious candidates for its use - agriculture and solar power.

    Green roofs have been growing in popularity for more than a decade, and in some cases, growing in scale too. Green roofs can provide a habitat for birds and insects in an otherwise hostile environment.

    Cities can be several degrees warmer than the surrounding countryside. Green roofs come with the added benefit of mitigating the dreaded urban heat island effect. Trees and green spaces can absorb shortwave radiation, and use it to evaporate water from their leaves — a kind of 'double cooling' effect.

    With food security and urban nutrition ever-higher on the agenda for the United Nations, there's also a worldwide movement of using green roofs for hyper-local food production. In regions with suitable climates, hundreds of different vegetables, fruits, and salad leaves can be grown on rooftops.

    But what about solar power? With so many cities now stopping using fossil fuels, and the costs of solar panels dropping dramatically, PV systems have become the 'go to' option for generating distributed power in built-up areas. And, even with standard commercial panels, the energy gains are dramatic. It is estimated that rooftop PV systems could generate almost 40% of electricity demands nationwide.

    There's no doubt that in both cases, a network of 'productive rooftops' could benefit the local community by supplying a portion of a necessary resource — either food or electricity — while also reducing their environmental burden. But is one better than the other?

    This was the question posed by researchers from MIT and the University of Lisbon in a recent paper in the journal Cities. Focusing on the rooftops of a mixed-use neighborhood in Lisbon, they carried out a Cost-Benefit Analysis. Starting with existing data on everything from installation costs and resources used, to carbon footprint and yield, they modelled the impact that each installation would have on the local community over a period of 50 years.

    And by looking at it that way, they concluded that for Lisbon, the use of rooftops for food production could yield significantly higher local value than solar PV energy generation. Of course, this is very site-specific. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to make cities more sustainable, and anyone who tells you otherwise is massively over-simplifying a complex issue. Now, all I hope is that some of those decision makers start using it.

    Two of the saddest words in the English language are "if only". I live my life with the goal of never having to say those words, because they convey regret, lost opportunities, mistakes, and disappointment.

    My father is famous in our family for saying, "Take the extra minute to do it right. "I always try to live by the "extra minute" rule. When my children were young and likely to cause accidents, I always thought about what I could do to avoid an "if only" moment, whether it was something minor like moving a cup full of hot coffee away from the edge of a counter, or something that required a little more work such as taping padding (衬垫) onto the sharp corners of a glass coffee table.

    I don't only avoid those "if only "moments when it comes to safety. It's equally important to avoid "if only" in our personal relationships. We all know people who lost a loved one and regretted that they had lost an opportunity to say "I love you" or "I forgive you". When my father announced he was going to the eye doctor across from my office on Good Friday, I told him that it was a holiday for my company and I wouldn't be there. But then I thought about the fact that he's 84 years old and I realized that I shouldn't give up an opportunity to see him. I called him and told him I had decided to go to work on my day off after all.

    I know there will still be occasions when I have to say "if only "about something, but my life is definitely better because of my policy of doing everything possible to avoid that eventuality (不测的事) . And even though it takes an extra minute to do something right, or it occasionally takes an hour or two in my busy schedule to make a personal connection, I know that I' m doing the right thing. I'm buying myself peace of mind and that's the best kind of insurance for my emotional well-being.

    The world's oceans will likely lose about one-sixth of their fish and other creatures within 100 years if climate change continues on its current path. Every degree Celsius that the world's oceans warm, their biomass is expected to drop five percent, a study found.

    The study predicts that if there is no change in the rate of worldwide greenhouse gas production, there will be a 17-percent loss of biomass by the year 2100. But, if the world reduces carbon pollution, biomass losses could be limited to only about 5 percent.

    Warming temperatures are the biggest issue. But climate change also produces oceans that are more acidic and have less oxygen. This also harms sea life. Much of the world depends on the oceans for food or work.

    The findings make sense and the possible effects of the predicted losses of animal life are huge. "Climate change has the potential to cause serious new conflicts over ocean resource use as the human population continues to grow," said scientists.

    Marine biologist Boris Worm, who helped run the study, added that the "building blocks of marine life—plankton and bacteria—may decline less heavily."

    "Those marine animals that we use directly, and care about most deeply, are predicted to suffer the most," said Worm. He works at Canada's Dalehousie University.

    Scientists had already believed climate change would likely reduce future ocean life. But past computer-based studies looked at only part of the picture or used only one model. The latest study used six different computer models to give the best picture look yet, William Cheung said.

    University of Georgia marine biologist Samantha Joye was not part of the research. But she praised the study as well researched and extremely detailed, and called it "an urgent call for action".

    My sister Alice and I have been trying to get people to stop dropping cigarette (香烟)butts(烟头)for seven years. One day, we were walking in our hometown and saw hundreds of cigarette butts on the ground. They made the town look so ugly that we decided to start a group to make people dropping butts. We called it "No Butts About It".

    At first, we drew pictures with "The Earth is not your ashtray(烟灰缸)"written on them. We put the pictures around our hometown—in parks, by beaches, and along roads. We wanted to make people understand that dropping butts hurts the environment. Most smokers don't think that dropping butts hurts the Earth. But it does, and all rubbish does!

    Later, we wrote to companies and asked them for money to help us. We used the money to buy ashtrays to give to smokers. We wanted smokers to carry the ashtrays with them so they didn't have to drop butts.

    At the moment, we are trying to get cigarette companies to put an ashtray in each pack of cigarettes. Some companies want to do it. Many people have started to join our group since it began. Today there are 45 other "No Butts About It" groups in America.

    Now there even groups in England, Australia, and India! Many newspapers have written about my sister and me over the last seven years. And we have won many prizes for what we do. But we are not interested in prizes. We just want to make the Earth a better and cleaner place for animals, plants and people.

    One day, it will be.